Dept of Primary Care Clinical Sciences, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, West Midlands, United Kingdom.
J Phys Act Health. 2012 Sep;9(7):954-61. doi: 10.1123/jpah.9.7.954.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: While point-of-choice prompts consistently increase stair climbing, experimental comparisons of message content are rare. Here, the effects of 2 messages differing in complexity about the health outcomes obtainable from stair climbing were compared.
In a UK train station with 2 independent platforms exited by identical 39-step staircases and adjacent escalators, observers recorded travelers ascent method and gender from 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. on 2 weekdays during February/March 2008 (n = 48,697). Baseline observations (2-weeks) preceded a 3-week poster phase. Two posters (594 × 841 mm) that differed in the complexity of the message were positioned at the point-of-choice between ascent methods, with 1 placed on each side of the station simultaneously. Logistic regression analysis was conducted in April 2010.
Omnibus analysis contained main effects of the intervention (OR = 1.07, CI = 1.02-1.13, P = .01) and pedestrian traffic volume (OR = 5.42, CI = 3.05-9.62, P < .001). Similar effects occurred for complex (OR = 1.10, CI = 1.02-1.18, P = .01) and simple messages (OR = 1.07, CI = 1.01-1.13, P = .02) when analyses controlled for the influence of pedestrian traffic volume. There was reduced efficacy for the complex message during busier periods (OR = 0.36, CI = 0.20-0.66, P = .001), whereas the simple message was immune to these effects of traffic volume.
Pedestrian traffic flow in stations can influence message effectiveness. Simple messages appear more suitable for busy sites.
背景/目的:虽然选择点提示始终可以增加爬楼梯的次数,但关于消息内容的实验比较却很少。在这里,比较了关于爬楼梯可获得的健康结果的 2 条消息,这两条消息在复杂程度上有所不同。
在英国的一个火车站,有 2 个独立的站台,出口处都有相同的 39 级楼梯和相邻的自动扶梯,观察者从 2008 年 2 月/ 3 月的每周一至周五上午 8 点到 10 点,在 8 个不同的时间段记录乘客的上升方法和性别(n = 48697)。在海报阶段的 3 周之前,先进行了 2 周的基线观察。在上升方法的选择点处,放置了 2 个大小不同的海报(594 × 841 毫米),海报的信息复杂程度不同,每个站台的一侧各放置一个,同时放置。2010 年 4 月进行了逻辑回归分析。
总体分析包含了干预措施的主要效果(OR = 1.07,CI = 1.02-1.13,P =.01)和行人交通量的主要效果(OR = 5.42,CI = 3.05-9.62,P <.001)。对于复杂(OR = 1.10,CI = 1.02-1.18,P =.01)和简单消息(OR = 1.07,CI = 1.01-1.13,P =.02),当分析控制行人交通量的影响时,也出现了类似的效果。在繁忙时段,复杂消息的效果降低(OR = 0.36,CI = 0.20-0.66,P =.001),而简单消息则不受这些交通量的影响。
车站内的行人流量会影响消息的有效性。简单的消息似乎更适合繁忙的场所。